OIA consultation: Harassment and sexual misconduct university guide

The Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) has launched a consultation to update its guidance on handling reports of harassment and sexual misconduct in higher education within the Good Practice Framework. 

This follows the Office for Students’ (OfS) introduction of regulatory condition E6, which came into force on 1 August 2025 and requires higher education providers in England to publish a single comprehensive source of information on this topic. 

WonkHE has reported that harassment and sexual misconduct cases remain under five per cent of the OIA’s caseload but it upholds or settles a higher proportion of these cases than under any other complaint category.

Regulatory context for harassment and sexual misconduct in higher education

Condition E6 requires providers to ensure staff and students understand professional boundaries and can easily access information about policies, procedures, and support relating to harassment and sexual misconduct. These requirements apply to both staff-to-student and student-to-student conduct.

About the consultation

The OIA’s Good Practice Framework, last updated in 2022, supports providers in developing fair processes for complaints and appeals. Drawing on its experience as the final stage for student complaints, the OIA aims to help providers design effective procedures for handling allegations of harassment and sexual misconduct. The consultation closes on 6 February 2026, with final guidance expected later in the year.

Key principles in the updated framework

The updated framework emphasises core principles: accessibility, clarity, fairness, independence, confidentiality, inclusivity, flexibility, proportionality, timeliness, and improving the student experience. It recommends separating reporting processes from disciplinary proceedings to clarify responsibilities and decision-making.

Setting standards and removing barriers to reporting

Providers are urged to set clear expectations for behaviour and make it easy for students to report concerns. The draft guidance suggests there should be no time limit for reporting incidents, and providers should offer anonymous reporting options to help identify trends to prevent complaints being dismissed for being brought too late. We envisage that many providers would struggle to investigate historic complaints raised many years or decades later, if records had been deleted.

The OIA in particular has suggested that a report from a student could cover both informal disclosures and more formal reports. However, some commentators have suggested that a distinction should be drawn between a report which is going to be taken forward as part of a formal process and a disclosure from a student who does not wish to take the matter further.

Trauma-informed response

A trauma-informed approach is recommended in the draft guidance, with staff trained to understand how trauma affects students’ engagement. The initial focus should be on the reporting student’s wellbeing, offering support and assessing immediate risks without questioning the veracity of their account at the outset.

Risk assessment and precautionary measures

Risk assessments help determine if immediate action is needed to safeguard students. Precautionary measures should be proportionate and not punitive, aiming to manage identified risks with minimal disruption.

Support and representation

Disciplinary procedures should remain internal and not overly formal. Well-resourced student support services should be sufficient in most cases, though legal advice may be required or sought in serious matters. Other commentators have suggested that the OIA at times makes assumptions in the consultation document that specialist support is available within all HE providers which may be out of reach for smaller institutions.

Evaluating evidence

The draft guidance warns providers to be careful when evaluating witness credibility, recognising that trauma can affect memory and behaviour. Specialist training can help decision-makers understand why students may delay reporting or continue interacting with the alleged perpetrator.

Informing students of outcomes

This may be an uncomfortable aspect of the draft guidance, as reporting students are not always told the outcome of a disciplinary process. 

Whereas the draft guidance indicates that unless a reporting student requests otherwise, they must be told the outcome of disciplinary processes, including the decisions made and the reasons for them. Regulation E6.11.n.viii (page 40) requires providers to clearly explain how all directly affected individuals - including those who report, experience, or are accused of harassment or sexual misconduct - will be informed about outcomes and reasons.

Complaints and continuous improvement

Reporting students should be able to complain about the support received or the process outcomes. Providers are encouraged to collect data and monitor trends to inform preventative and educational initiatives.

How to respond

Higher education providers are invited to submit comments by 6 February 2026, helping to shape best practice in this vital area of student welfare and protection.

Further help and support

Our higher education team advises universities and colleges on student disciplinary matters, regulatory compliance, and the implementation of policies and procedures for handling harassment and sexual misconduct. If you would like to discuss the implications of the consultation on the draft OIA guidance for your institution, please get in touch.